Brown County Commission approves one-year moratorium on transmission pipelines

Elisa Sand, Aberdeen News
·5 min read
Summit Carbon Solutions proposed route for the carbon dioxide pipeline. The route is represented by the blue line, while the yellow stars indicate participating ethanol plants.

Brown County has approved a one-year moratorium on the construction of transmission pipelines.

That includes a carbon capture pipeline proposed by Summit Carbon Solutions.

The resolution, "imposes a temporary moratorium on the issuance of any and all permits, licenses or approvals for the construction, installation or use of any transmission pipeline requiring the approval of the South Dakota Public Utilities Commission, traversing those lands contained within the unincorporated areas of Brown County, South Dakota, including the construction of any transmission pipeline-related infrastructure."

It was approved unanimously at Tuesday's commission meeting at the Brown County Courthouse.

The resolution gives the Brown County Planning and Zoning Office up to a year to review related regulations. And, Brown County State's Attorney Ernest Thompson said, if that review process is not complete in that time, the moratorium could be extended a second year with the passage of another resolution.

More: McPherson Co. landowners' lawsuit claims Summit surveys without consent are unconstitutional

Approval came after significant discussion that included not only landowners who oppose Summit's pipeline, but also Dan Lederman, senior advisor for LS2 Group, who spoke against the moratorium.

LS2 Group, based in Iowa, is a public relations and marketing group working with Summit Carbon Solutions.

Summit has applied for a permit with the South Dakota Public Utilities Commission to construct a pipeline through several South Dakota counties. Carbon dioxide emissions from 32 ethanol plants in five states would be sequestered underground in North Dakota to reduce carbon emissions. That would allow the ethanol plants to sell their product in states with low carbon fuel standards. Seven ethanol plants in South Dakota have signed on with the project.

More: PUC approves Summit Carbon Solutions' request for a permit application deadline extension

The line would run about 2,000 miles and has an estimated cost of $4.5 billion.

Lederman said he's been working with Summit since last summer and noted that a majority of commission discussion on the topic has been by people who are opposed to the project. But, he said, one perspective that hasn't been heard is from someone representing an ethanol plant — a business that will benefit from this work.

'We would like more time to work with the county'

Lederman said because of the extension of deadlines by the PUC, Summit's pipeline permit likely won't be considered until March, April or May, which gives the county plenty of time to review its regulations.

"We would like more time to work with the county," he said.

Lederman also argued that passing the moratorium would have unintended consequences such as, for instance, delaying approval of road haul agreements and non-environmental permitting.

More: PUC approves Summit Carbon Solutions' request for a permit application deadline extension

When asked by Commissioner Mike Gage if Lederman had a timeline to have someone from the ethanol industry speak to the commission, he didn't have an answer.

Lederman also spoke about wanting to communicate better about the project, but that was countered by concerns from others in attendance who said property owners and businesses near the proposed route of the pipeline are unaware it's in the works.

There would be about 30 miles of pipeline in Brown County, Neighboring McPherson County has also approved a pipeline moratorium, as have a handful of other South Dakota counties.

Summit Carbon Solutions responds to moratorium

Summit Carbon Solutions issued a statement Tuesday afternoon about the Brown County Commission's decision.

"Federal and state-level agencies have always maintained the primary role when it comes to regulating and permitting CO2 pipelines, rather than individual counties," it reads in part. "Summit Carbon Solutions is disappointed the Brown County Commission chose to ignore that established and long-standing process, while also allowing a small handful of opponents to continue spreading misinformation regarding our project."

More: It's hard for farms and agriculture businesses to find workers. Here's how they're adjusting

Summit claims it has negotiated voluntary agreements with more than 1,300 landowners and has more than 2,000 completely voluntary agreements along the proposed route in five states.

"The pipeline represents a nearly $800 million investment in South Dakota that will open new economic opportunities for ethanol producers, strengthen the marketplace for corn growers and generate tens of millions of additional property taxes to help local communities support our schools, hospitals, roads and more," according to the statement.

Cost to improve road near Richmond Lake would be at least $98,000

Commissioners also discussed various costs to improve 3/4 of a mile of 128th Street on the southwestern side of Richmond Lake. Area residents concerned about the road's condition came before the commission a week ago. In response, commissioners asked Brown County Highway Superintendent Dirk Rogers to provide improvement cost estimates. Commissioners heard the following:

  • Grading to provide a level surface: $330,000.

  • Asphalt surface: $181,000.

  • Blotter (a thicker chip and seal surface for gravel roads): $48,000.

  • Road prep for the blotter: $30,000.

  • Engineering, inspection and designs: $20,000.

  • Future maintenance costs $30,000.

For designing, engineering, preparing for and adding a blotter seal coat, the cost is estimated to be $98,000. If commissioners opted to have grading work done to provide a more level surface, the cost jumps to $398,000.

An asphalt surface, which wasn't discussed by the commission, would cost considerably more, probably about $530,000

Rogers said none of those expenses are in the 2022 budget, nor are they presently on the list of proposed work for 2023. While commissioners discussed a variety of options, including adding money to the highway department budget to accomplish the work, Rogers said he doesn't recommend improvements to 128th road at this time.

More: Brown County Commission discusses Richmond Lake roads, flooding in Hecla area

He said he has two bridge replacement projects planned in 2023 and two road projects, one of which includes surface work that was delayed.

While no decision was made, Commission Chairman Duane Sutton said commissioners are working on the 2023 budget, and the board will make a decision in the next month whether extra money will be added to the budget to improve the road.

This article originally appeared on Aberdeen News: brown county passes moratorium transmission pipelines